by a vindication of the writers whom Hall had previously attacked
in his "Virgidemiarum;" addressing that author, Marston exclaims:
"Vaine envious detractor from the good,
"What cynicke spirit stirreth in thy blood?
"Cannot a poore mistaken title scape,
"But thou must that unto thy Tumbrell scrape?"
and he subsequently adds four of the smoothest lines in his volume:
"So have I seene the March wind strive to fade
"The fairest hewe that art or nature made:
"So envy still doth barke at cleareste shine,
"And strives to staine heroyick acts devine."
The dedication to Good Opinion is subscribed W. K., the initials
of William Kinsayder, the name under which Marston published his
earlier productions.[6]
From the licentious character of this book the prelates Whitgift
and Bancroft ordered its suppression and destruction soon after its
appearance.
30.
The first part of the Life and Raigne of King Henry the IIII.
Extending to the end of the first yeare of his raigne. Written by J.
H. Imprinted at London by John Wolfe, and are to be solde at his shop
in Pope's Head Alley, neere to the Exchange. 1599.
This book was written by Sir John Haywarde, L.L.D. It was dedicated
in very encomiastic terms to the Earl of Essex, but it so highly
irritated Queen Elizabeth, that proceedings were taken against the
author as appears from the following documents.
Among the Domestic State Papers of the year 1600 are
interrogatories by Lord Chief Justice Popham, to be administered to
Dr. Hayward in these terms;
"To examyn hym who made the preface to the Reader.
"Wherein he conceaveth or ment that booke might be not onely
patterns for pryvat dyreccion and for matters of state, to instruct
young men more shortly and old men more fully?
"Where he hadd any warrant to sett down that Kyng H. the 2. never
taxed the subject, or left 900000 li. in his coffers?
"In what poynt were the othes unlawful taken by R. the 2. of his
subjects?
"When were any skattering forces sent in hys tyme into Ireland, and
under whom, and what warrant hadd he to wryte so?
"What moved hym to sett down that any were in dysgrace for their
servys there?
"What moved hym to sett down that the nobylyte were then hadd in
contempt, or that they were but base that were culted about that
Kyng?
"What moved hym to sett down that the subjects were bound for their
servys to the state, and not to the person of the Kyng?
"What moved hym to maynteyn with arguments never mencyoned in the
history, that yt myght be laweful for the subjects to depose the
Kyng for any cause?
"What moved hym to add unto yt so many presidentes off that kynd in
alowans thereof?
"What moved hym to alowe that ys well for comen weal that the Kyng
is dead?
"What was the true caws of settyng forth this symple story in this
tyme, and thus fortefyed with arguments to the worst sens, omytt
every princypal poynt that made agaynst the Traytors or Rebelles?
"Myght he thynke that thys hystory, sett forth in sort as yt ys,
wold not be very dangerous to come amongst the comon sort of people?
"Whom he made prevy to hys purpos of wrytyng thys hystory, and what
alowans gave they of it, where and when?
"Who were the anymatters of you to sett forth thys story, and to
what end?
"When did you fyrst resolve to sett forth this hystory, and where
and at what tyme did you begynne yt?
"By what meanes came you to the records of these thyngs which you
have sett down to have been done in that tyme?"[7]
Then follows an Epistle to the reader, vindicating the book from
intending any attack on the present times; thus,
"Gentle Reader, thy frendly acceptance of these loose labors, the
accompt of my idle howres, from exercises of greater profit and
use, hath moved me, before I proceede any further, to overlooke
and overlicke them once againe, as the beare is said to doe her
unformed whelpes, and thereby both in portion and proportion to
amend the same. I _have purposely passed_ over many imputations,
and some secrete sences, which the deepe searchers of our time have
rather framed then found: partly upon the science of myne owne
conscience, and partly seeing no reason wherefore they should be
more applied to this booke _then to the_ originall authors out of
which it hath bene gathered, onely one offence I thought meete to
meete with, and that is, concerning the rehearsall _of certaine
oppressions both unusuall and intollerable_, and to no profitable
purpose and end; which I heare to be hardly thought of and taken,
not in regard of any moderate judgment, which may easily perceive
how full it lyeth in the plaine path of the history, but _for
feare_ of some quarrellous conceites, which may interpret it to be
meant of an other tyme (although nothing like) then that whereof
it was reported; which in one degree of melancholy further, would
imagine the very belles to sound whatsoever hammereth within
their heads. For my part _I am of opinion_, that no imposition
at any time have bene either hurtfull to a prince or hatefull to
the people, except two qualities do concurre: first, that it be
excessive,--secondly, that it be wildly and wastfully expended:
for if the one fayle, it never seemeth greevous; if the other, not
odious. But if it be both moderate and also necessary; or great,
joyned with greatnesse and importancy of neede: it standeth neither
with reason nor with religion, for any subject to repine against
it. _For the prince is a person of_ authority and trust, _to
imploy_ the goods of the people, for their common good, _either_ in
maintayning order among themselves, or in repelling the enterprises
of their enemies: neyther can they possibly be preserved by the
prince, if they withdraw theire owne endeavour and supply. And this
the ancient wise men have endeavoured by a fable to make familiare;
that all the parts of the body were once offended against the
stomacke, for that they saw themselves vexed with perpetuall
travayle and toyle, and the stomacke onely, not onely to be idle,
but to consume all that they could provide. Hereupon they conspired
together, that the hand should no more worke, nor the feete walke,
nor the eye looke about, nor the mouth receyve, prepare, and send
downe foode: so the stomacke not receyving nourishment, could
not impart the same againe to every part of the body: whereby,
first they languished and (being neere at the point to perish)
at the last perceyved, that both their labour to get, and their
liberality to geve, in appearance was for the stomacke, but in
deede for themselves. This tale hath bene verified by many truthes,
whereof I will rehearse one, and so not exceede the measure of an
Epistle. When the Turke came against the city of Constantinople,
the Emperour was not able to wage so many souldiers as might stand
single upon the walles. Whereupon he often assembled the wealthy
citizens, and sometymes went in person to their houses, leaving
nothing undone or unsayd which might be of force to stirre in them
either piety or pitty, both for the preservation of their country
and frends, and for theire owne particuler safeties: but the
miserable monymongers, being as loath to take benefit of their gold
as if it had not bene their owne, buried it under the ground, and
denyed that they were able to make contribution. So either for want
or weakenes of resistance, the Turkes soone became masters of the
city: who in their first fury set all the streetes on streame with
bloud, and afterwards, covetousnes succeeding cruelty, they left no
closet nor corner unransacked and unrifled, wherein missing their
expected pray, they ripped the bellies and searched the bowels of
their wretched captives: lastly they turned up the foundations of
many thousand buildings, and there found such infinite masses of
mony, as did strike them rather into a maze then into a merveylle,
how so rich a city could possibly be taken. I would not wish the
like mischance to our like dull and heavy conceyted repyners,
which neyther see nor seeke any other thing but only the stuffing
of their owne bags, because it cannot happen unto them without a
greater and further mischiefe: but I could wish that they might be
fitted as once were the Siracusans, upon whom when Dyonisius had
imposed a contribution, they murmured and complayned, and denyed
that they were able to beare that burthen; whereupon he encreased
the imposition and they likewise their complaints, but Dyonisius
ceased not to levy it upon them, untill he perceyved them eyther
content by being reduced to their duety, or quiete by being drawne
drye."[8]
The folowing is the confession of Dr. Hayward, made July the 11th,
1600.
11th July, 1600,
at the Courte.
The confession of Doctor Heyward
before the Lord Keper, the Lord
Admirall, Mr. Secretary, and Mr.
Chauncelor of the Eschequer.
"1. He confessed that the stories mencioned in the Archbishop's
oration, tendinge to prove that deposers of kings and princes have
had good successe, were not taken out of any other cronicle, but
inserted by himselfe, but said that after in the history the Bishop
of Carlile confuteth the same, but for the confutation the Bishop
was committed to the Marshalsea, and the whole parlement concluded
against the Bishop's opinion; and in troth in 1. H. 4. the Bishop
of Carlile was attainted of treason.
"2. He confessed he had red of a Benevolence in the tyme of Richard
3. and not before, and yet that he inserted the same in the raigne
of Richard 2.
"3. He said that as he toke it, the substaunce of the consultation
for reducing the Irishe rebell, he had out of William of Malmesbury.
"4. He affirmed that presently after the booke was printed, Woolfe
the printer thereof caried the same to the Erle of Essex, and about
a moneth after the epistle was taken out.
"Edw. Coke."[9]
On July 13th, 1600, Wolfe the stationer was examined before
Attorney General Coke respecting the printing of the book in
question. The examination is as follows:--
"The examynacion of John Wolfe, Stacionour, taken before me, Edward
Coke, Esquire, Her Majestie's Attorney Generall, this 13 of July,
1600.
"He sayth that Docter Hayward beinge a meere strainger to this
examynant, cam to hym and requested hym to printe the booke intytuled
"Henry the Fourth," which he did in Februarye, 1599. The booke
havinge no epistell dedicatorye nor to the reader, when he brought
yt firste unto hym, which this examynat desiringe to have, he this
examynate requested hym to dedicatt the booke to some man of honour
and reputacion; and uppon some conference hadd between them, this
examynat praid hym yt might be dedicated to the Earle of Essex, for
that he was a marciall man and was for to goe into Ireland, and the
booke treated of Irishe causes. And this examynat sayth that within
a day or twoe after, Docter Hayward delivered to this examynate the
Epistelles to the Earle and to the reader; and the booke beinge
fynished, Docter Hayward then beinge sicke, this examynate carryed
the booke to the Earle of Essex, then preparinge to goe into Ireland:
which the Earle receved, and givinge noe aunsweire, carryed the booke
with hym into his chamber, which he taketh to be at Whytehall; and
abought a fortnight or three weekes after, the wardens of the company
receved order from my Lord of Caunterbury that the Epistell dedicated
to the Earle should be cutt out.
"And further sayth that fyve or sixe hundred of them weire sould
before any suche comaundment was gyven; for he sayth that never any
booke was better sould or more desired that ever he printed then this
book was; and sayth that out of the residew, (beinge five or six
hundred) this examynat cut out the said Epistell and sould them also
within verry short tyme after. And abought Easter tearme followinge,
the people callinge exsedinglie for yt, this examynate obtayned a new
edition of the said Docter Hayward wherein many thinges weire altered
from the former, and yet the vollume incresed.
"And sayth further that Docter Hayward understandinge that many
hade spoken agaynst this former edition hadd made an epistell
apologeticall to sett to the second edition, as this examynate
thinketh; and 15 hundred of these bookes beinge allmost fynished
in the Whisson hollidayes, 1599, weire taken by the wardens of
the Stacionours and delivered to the Lord Busshopp of London. And
this examynate sayth that he dothe not remember the particuler
allteracions which weire in the latter edition from the former, nor
hathe not any of the said bookes, nor never finished nor sould any of
the said bookes, nor cannot come by any of them. And this examynate
sayth that the said appologie, as he thincketh, did tend to no other
end then to satisfie the people of the author's meaninge in wrytinge
the booke, and that the author said he ment not as some interprit
yt. And this examynate sayth that the said Mr. Docter Hayward when
he was tould by this examynate that some did fynde faulte with the
former edition, he desired this examynate to intreat them that he
might speak with them to knowe what they did mislike, to the intent
that he might express his meaninge therein. And this examynate sayth
that the people havinge dyvers tymes sythence called uppon hym for to
procure the continewation of the same history by the same author, he
hathe likewise intreated the same author to goe forward in wrytinge
the said history, which he thincketh he hath don some parte of.
"This examynate sayth further that after the deliverye of the book
to the Earle as aforesaid, he went three or four tymes within one
fortnight after, by the Docter's consent, to the Earle, being at
courte at Richmont, to lerne what the Earle would say to yt, but
allwayes this examynat was putt of by some of the Earle's men with
aunsweire the Earle was much busied aboute his voyage to Ireland.
And so this examynate never spake with the Earle after the first
deliverye of the bookes, and further sayth that all of the laste
eddition weire burnt in my Lord of London's house; and sayth that
the coppie nowe delivered uppon his examynacion is a trew coppie of
the epistell appolegetticall, the orygenall whereof this examynat
delivered to my Lord of London under Docter Haywarde's owne hand. And
sayth that the orygenall of the first edition beinge interlyned and
altered accordinge to the second edition, for so much as was don this
examynate delivered to Mr. Barker, Register of the Highe Commyssion.
And sayth that sithence the last edition was supprest, a great number
have beene with this examynate to have bought the same. And sayth
that he hadd no recompence or composition at alle for the printinge
of the said first and last edition, but of his owne free will he gave
some halfe dosen of the said bookes, whereof one was to the Earle and
the other to the author. And this examynate sayth further that he was
commytted fourteen dayes for the printinge of the last edition, and
lost all the books of that edition.
"Examinatur per
"Edw. Coke. John Wolf."[10]
On July 20th, 1600, Samuel Harsnett, examiner of the press,
afterwards Bishop of Chichester, sent the following letter and
petition to the Attorney General to excuse himself for having
approved Hayward's book, thus:--
"Right worshipfull, I have not yet received eny bookes from my Lord
of London, and so am not able to performe my taske in comparing
them according to my promise. This for griefe of hart and confusion
of face I am skarce able to write, that I shold be behinde hand to
your most graciouse divine kindnesse towards me. I have sent myne
aunswer enclosed, the onlie part of my dutye that I cold performe,
moste humblie beseeching your goodnes to accept it in good part,
and to be a father unto me as you have begunne. The God of Heven
sees and knowes I am innocent; at casus leso numine crimen habet, my
poore estate, my credit, my selfe, and more then my selfe doe hang
uppon your graisouse countenance, for I muste crave pardon to tell
an unmannerlie secrett: I have a poore weake gentlewoman my wife
in childbed, who since your messanger his being at myne house did
neither eat, nor drinke, nor sleape for fear, and yet I have twentie
tymes reade over your most graciouse lettars unto her. The Lord of
Heven requite you, for I and my poore frends shall never be able,
and so with teares I humblie take my leave. From my poore house at
Chigwell, this XXti of July, 1600.
"Your worship his bought
"and bounden servaunt,
"Sa. Harsnett."
"In moste humble wise complaininge sheweth unto your Worship your
dailie Orator, Samuel Harsnett, that whereas the Author of a Pamphlet
published in print in anno 1599, intituled the 'Raigne of King Henry
the Fourth,' hath endevored to excuse his publishinge the sayd
pamphlett, as being allowed and approved by your sayd Orator, it may
please your worship in your grave wisdome to consider that this his
allegation can be no colour of excuse unto him, in regard of these
reasons ensuynge.
"Firste, for that it hath been custome and use for eny man that
entended in good meaning to put a booke in print, the Author himselfe
to present the booke unto the Examiner, and to acquaynt him with his
scope and purpose in the same: the Author of this pamphlet concealed
himselfe, and nether spake nor conferred with your Orator concerning
this pamphlett, (notwithstanding we were both students togither in
Pembroochall in Cambridge, and both of a tyme and standing in the
colledge), but the Author delivered his pamphlet unto a gentleman in
my Lord of London his house, who begged your Orator his approbation
unto the same in the name of a cautel of our English chronicles
phrased and flourished over onlie to shewe the Author his pretie witt.
"Secondlie, that whereas your Orator his approbation of eny booke
whatsoever is but a leading and inducement to my Lord of London, my
master, to passe his Lordship his further approbation to the same,
without which his Lordship his further approbation your Orator his
allowance is no sufficient warrant for the Author to prynt his booke:
the Author of this pamphlett published his pamphlett without my Lord
and master his approbation at all, contrarie to warrant in that
behalfe.
"Thirdlie, the Author hath wronged your said Orator muche, and hath
abused your Worship with false enformation, in alledging for himselfe
that your Orator allowed his pamphlett as it was and is published
in print; for that the Author knoweth in his conscience this is
true, that when his pamphlett had mine approbation it was heddlesse,
without epistle, preface, or dedication at all, which moved me to
thinke it was a meer rhetorical exornation of a part of our Englishe
historie to shewe the foyle of the Author his witt: and after myne
approbation gotten thereunto, the Author foysted in an Epistle
dedicatorie to the Earle of Essex, which I neither allowed nor sawe,
and which if I had seen, I protest I shold never have allowed the
rest of the pamphlett.
"Fourthlie, it may please your grave wisdome graciouslie to consider
your Orator his mean condition and capacitie; that your sayd Orator
is a poore Divine, unacquainted with bookes and arguments of state,
and with consequenceis of that nature; that your Orator for ten or
twelve yeares past neither spake with nor saluted the Author of this
pamphlett, and so is cleer from privitye with his entendementes and
overtures in the same; that your Orator sett to his hand sodeinlie as
mooved by his freind, never reading (uppon his salvation) more then
one page of the hedlesse pamphlet; for which his unadvised negligence
he humblie beggeth your moste graciouse milder censure, that it may
be no imputation of bad meaninge unto him, who doth dailie in his
poore calinge, moste hartelie and zealouslie pray for the happinesse
of Her sacred Majestie and the state, and for the longe continuance
of Her Highnes most graciouse, blessed, divine government over us,
and doth from the bottom of his hart wishe shame and dreadfull
confusion upon all calumniators and underminers of the same.
"Your worship's moste humblie
"bounden Orator,
"Sa. Harsnett."[11]
On January 22nd, 1600/1, Hayward was, while in confinement in the
Tower, further examined before Sir John Peyton and the Attorney
General, thus:--
"The examination of John Heyward,
Doctor at lawe, taken at the tower,
this 22 of Jan., 1600.
"He confesseth that the preface to the reader was of his oune
indightinge, and saith that he intitled the same under the letteres
of A. P., as divers other wrighters had done in such like cases.
"He saith that he spake in his preface generally of histories; and
being demaunded whether he intended not to applie the preface of his
boke to his present historie, saith as before, he wrote his preface
generally of all histories and intended no particular by itselfe.
"He saith that he read in Foxe's booke of Actes and monuments that
King H. 2 never demaunded subsidie of his subjects, which he sett
forth towards the end of the raigne of that Kinge, and there he found
also that H. 2 after his death left in treasure nine hundred thousand
poundes besides his jewels and plate, and being demaunded wherfore he
inserted the same into the historie of H. 4, saith he taketh that to
be lawfull for any historiographer to insert any historie of former
tyme ynto that historie he wright, albeit no other historian of that
matter have mencioned the same, and that libertie is allowed by
Dionisius Hallicarnasseus.
"He sayth that the othe under hands and seales required and taken by
R. 2, was to knowe what every particuler man was worthe, to thentent
that they might be taxed thereafter; and no other othe was intended
by this examinante.
"He sayth he found in Walsingham (as he remembreth) that the forces
that were sent into Ireland by R. 2 were scattering and droppinge,
&c., though not in those termes, yet to the like sence; and that
those that did good service there were not rewarded with countenance,
&c.,: and sure he is that he had it there eyther in wordes or by
actions; and also that he gathered out of the actions of that Kinge
recorded by Walsingham, that matters of peace were managed by menne
of weakest sufficiency, by whose councell eyther ignorant or corrupt,
&c.
"He sayth the complaynt of Hereford to Mowbrey, reported in other
cronicles, do imply in sence that the kinge's councell accounted
auncient nobilitie a vaine jest,--wealth and vertue the ready meanes
to bring to destruction: which complaint is extant in Hall and
Polidore Virgill and many other wrighters. He sayth that he read in
Bodine and other authors that the subject was rather bounde to the
state then to the person of the kinge, which he inserted as a matter
spoken by the Earle of Derby and Duke Hereford to serve his owne
tourne, which is a libertie used by all good wrighters of historie,
and to invent reasons and speaches according to the matter; and
saith that Bodin's distinction is that where the government is
democraticall or aristocraticall, there the subject is bound to the
state rather then to the person that beare the title of a prince,
but where it is monarchicall, as in England, there the allegiance
is to the person of the prince; and being demaunded wherfore he
invented that the erle should speake so for that this government was
monarchicall, sayth that he found but remembreth not where he spake
to that purpose. And further saith that in the Bishops of Carlile's
speache he hath sett down that distinction and confuted the error,
and that he did of himselfe according to the example of the best
historians; and being reprehended for mencioning of that matter at
all, speciallie because the Erle that held the error prevailed, and
the Bishop that confuted it was punished, sayth that he did it after
the example of the best historians, that applie spechis according
to the matter. He sayth he sett forth the oration of the B. of
Caunterburie according to the matter he found in other authorities,
but remember them not, and cannot affirme that he found those eight
stories in any oration the archbishop made in any other cronicle, but
saith as before that it is lawfull for an historian so to doe, and
besides he confuteth the same, page 107 in the Bishop of Carlisle's
speach, the last line of that page.
"He confesseth that he bringeth in as his own speach that it was not
amisse in regard of the comonwelth that he (meaning King R. 2) was
deade, yet they who caused his death, &c., which he sayed of himselfe
for preventing of civil warres in respect of 2 concurrents or
competitors. Being demanded what was the reason why he sett forth the
orations of the B. of Caunterbury and the erle of Derby, seing that
they tend to greate ill and to thinges most unlawfull, sayth that
there can be nothing done, be it never so ill or unlawfull, but must
have a shadowe, and every councell must be according to the action.
He sayth that he selected out this single historie for that Hall
beginneth there, and Ascham his scoolemaster commende that historie
if it were well penned, before any other; and being demanded wherfore
then he followed not Hall in his historie, sayth that he followed him
but suplied it out of other histories, and had an intention as he
saith to have continued the historie.
"And for the words spoken by King R. 2, that princes must not rule
without limitation, &c., he affirmeth that to be a true opinion so
it be rightlie understood, and that he intended that the same was
not to be taken generally, but that princes were to be limitted by
the lawe divine and the lawe of nature onlie; and being demaunded
where he had the same, saith that it is about 3 yeres since the booke
was written, and cannot remembere out of what author he toke it, but
saith he fynd it in Bod. ... and in the body of the civill lawes, &c.
"And being asked where he had this sentence, that othes are comonlie
spurned aside when they ly in the way to honur or reveng, saith that
the speach is of his own, as thinges done de facto et non de jure.
Being demaunded wherfore he added that King Richard II borowed money
by privy seales, sayth that he thinketh he had it out of Walsingham.
"For benevolences he found the matter but doth not defende the woord.
"Being asked where he found the description of the erle to be not
negligent to uncover the heode, to bowe the body, to stretch forth
the necke and arme, &c., he saith that he found in Hall and others
that he was of popular behavior, but for the particulars he tooke the
libertie of the best wrighters of histories of that kynd.
"Also the descriptions of the erle in divers places of his historie
he gathered out of his actions, and found the matter, not the
verie forme of woordes, in any other, as farre as he can call to
remembrance.[12]
"Being demanded, seing he wrote of matters of state and historie,
what menne of state or others he acquainted with his historie before
he published it, aunswereth that he wrote of an historie about 300
yeres past, and therfore he acquainted no person therwith before he
brought it to the printer.
"He sayth he began to wright this historie about a yere before it was
published, as he remembreth, but had the intent above a dussen yeres
before, but acquainted no man therewith. He sayth that he had the
articles and causes of deposition, the instrument of resignation, the
deposition, and other wordes out Hall and Walsingham; and sayth that
he had nothing of the printer for printing of the booke.[13]
"John Hayward.[14]
"John Peyton. Edw. Coke."
31.
The Letting Humor's Blood in the Head-vaine; with a new Morissco
daunced by Seven Satyres upon the bottome of Diogenes' Tubbe. (1600.)
The Knave of Clubbs. 'Tis merry when Knaves meete. (1600.)
The author of these tracts was Samuel Rowlands, a prolific writer
of the end of the sixteenth and early part of the succeeding
century. He appears to have commenced his literary career in the
year 1598 by the publication of a collection of sacred poems
entitled "The Betraying of Christ, Judas in Despaire, the Seven
Words of our Saviour on the Crosse, &c.," but soon found that
humorous pieces were more saleable, and these being perhaps more
suited to the bent of his mind, he changed his style accordingly.
The Knave of Clubbs upon its appearance in the year 1600 gave
such offence, on account of the severity of its satire and the
obviousness of its allusions, that an order was made that it should
be burnt, first publicly, and afterwards in the Hall Kitchen of
the Stationers' Company. The order is dated October 26, 1600, and
is worded as follows: "Yt is ordered that the next court-day two
bookes lately printed, th'one called _The Letting of Humor's Blood
in the Head Vayne_, th'other _A Mery Metinge, or 'tis mery when
Knaves mete_, shal be publiquely burnt, for that they conteyne
matters unfytt to be published; then to be burnd in the Hall
Kytchen, with other Popish bookes and thinges that were lately
taken."
The first tract mentioned in the order as containing matters
unfit to be published was one of the most popular of Rowlands'
productions. It was originally printed under the title given
above, but upon its condemnation by the Stationers' Company, the
bookseller changed its title to "Humour's Ordinarie, where a man
may be verie merrie and exceeding well used for his sixe-pence,"
and published an edition of it without date; but after the feeling
had subsided in 1611, it again appeared with its original title,
although the printer thought it prudent not to put his name on the
title page. The Knave of Clubbs was reprinted and edited for the
Percy Society in 1843 by Dr. Rimbault, and I am indebted to that
gentleman's introduction for the preceding account of this curious
book.
The Letting of Humor's Blood was reprinted in 1815 with an
introduction and notes by Sir Walter Scott, who says of Rowland,
"It has been remarked, that his muse is seldom found in the best
company; and to have become so well acquainted with the bullies,
drunkards, gamesters, and cheats, whom he describes, he must have
frequented the haunts of dissipation in which such characters are
to be found. But the humorous descriptions of low life exhibited in
his satires are more precious to antiquaries than more grave works,
and those who make the manners of Shakespeare's age the subject of
their study may better spare a better author than Samuel Rowlands."
32.
A discourse plainely proving the evident utilitie and urgent
necessitie of the desired happie union of the two famous kingdomes of
England and Scotland: by way of answer to certaine objections against
the same. (By John Thornborough, Bishop of Bristol.) London, 1604.
The joiefull and blessed reuniting the two mighty and famous
kingdomes, England and Scotland into their ancient name of Great
Brittaine. By John Bristoll. Printed at Oxford. N. d.
On May 26th, 1604, the attention of the House of Commons was
called to these books as tending to the derogation and scandal of
the proceedings of that House in the matter of the Union, and a
Committee was appointed to consider the heads of a message to be
sent to the Lords touching the same, and on June 1st the Committee
was named.
Shortly after this an inhibition from the Convocation House issued,
and on June 21st, 1604, it was resolved "to pray conference
touching the instrument read by the bishops at the late conference,
taxing the intermeddling of this house in matters of religion."
Also "to desire the submission of the Bishop in writing, to be
delivered unto them publicly in the House, before the Lords; and
that the books might be prohibited and suppressed."[15]
These books were both reprinted in one volume in the year 1641.
33.
Eastward Hoe. As it was playd in the Black-friers by the children
of her Maiestie's Revels. Made by Geo. Chapman, Ben. Jonson, Joh.
Marston. London, 1605.
It is said that for writing this comedy, wherein the authors were
accused of reflecting on the Scots, they were committed to prison,
and were in danger of losing their ears and noses. They however
received pardons, and Jonson, on his release from prison, gave an
entertainment to his friends, amongst whom were Camden and Selden.
In the midst of the entertainment his mother drank to him, and
showed him a paper of poison, which she intended to have given him
in his liquor, having first taken a portion of it herself, if the
sentence for his punishment had been executed.
34.
A relation of the state of religion, and with what hopes and policies
it hath beene framed and is maintained in the severall states of
these westerne parts of the world. (By Sir Edwin Sandys.) London,
1605.
This book was printed without any author's name, and generally
passed as the production of Sir Edwin Sandys; but it appears from
a subsequent edition published at the Hague in 1629, that the
first impression of 1605 (at least so it is alleged) "was but a
spurious stolne copy, in part epitomized, in part amplified, and
throughout most shamefully falsified and false printed from the
author's original, in so much, that the same knight was infinitely
wronged thereby, and as soon as it came to his knowledge that such
a thing was printed and passed under his name, he caused it (though
somewhat late, when it seemes two impressions were for the most
part vented) to be prohibited by authority, and as many as could
be recovered to be deservedly burnt, with power also to punish the
printers." This is referred to in a letter from Chamberlain to
Carleton, of November 7th, 1605, preserved among the Domestic State
Papers, where the writer says, "Sir Edwin Sandys' books burnt."
There were subsequent editions in 1632, 1638, and 1687.
35.
The Interpreter, or Booke containing the signification of words:
wherein is set foorth the true meaning of all, or the most part of
such words and termes, as are mentioned in the lawe writers, or
statutes of this victorious and renowned kingdome, requiring any
exposition or interpretation. Collected by John Cowell, Doctor, and
the King's Majestie's Professour of Civill Law in the Universitie of
Cambridge. Cambridge, (1607.)
On February 24th, 1609, this book was referred to in the House of
Commons by Sir Edwin Sandys, as "very unadvised and undiscreet;
tending to the disreputation of the House, and power of the common
laws;" and on the 27th of the same month a Committee was formed
to consider the book and to report thereon to the Lords.[16] On
March 25th, 1610, a proclamation was issued prohibiting the buying,
uttering, or reading of this book, in these terms:--
"This latter age and tymes of the world wherein wee are fallen, is
soe much given to verball profession, as well of religion as of
all comendable morall virtues, but wanting the actions and deedes
agreable to soe specious a profession, as it hath bredd such an
unsaciable curiosity in manye men's speritts, and such an itching
in the tonges and penns of most men, as nothing is left unsearched
to the bottome, both in talking and writing. For, from the verie
highest misteries in the Godhead, and the most inscrutable
councells in the Trinitye, to the verie lowest pitt of hell, and
the confused actions of the divills there, there is nothing nowe
unsearched into by the curiositie of men's braynes; men not being
contented with the knowledg of soe much of the will of God as it
hath pleased him to reveale, but they will needes sitt with him in
his most privie closett, and become privye of his most inscrutable
councells, and therefore it is noe wonder that men in theis our
dayes doe not spare to wade in all the depest misteries that belong
to the persons or state of kinges or princes that are Gods upon
earth, since wee see (as wee have alreadye saide) that they spare
not God himself; and this license that everie talker or writer nowe
assumeth to himself is come to this abuse, that manye Phormios
will give councell to Hanniball, and manye men that never went
out of the compasse of cloysters or colleges will freelie wade by
their writings in the depest misteries of monarchie and politique
government. Whereuppon it cannot otherwise fale out but that when
men goe out of their element and meddle with thinges above their
capacitie, themselves shall not onlie goe astray and stumble in
darknes, but will misleade alsoe divers others with themselves into
manye mistakings and errors, the proofe whereof we have lately had
by a booke written by Doctor Cowell, called the Interpreter. For
he being onlie a civillian by profession, and uppon that large
ground of a kynd of dictionarie as it were, following the alphabet,
haveing all kynd of purposes belonging to goverment and monarchie
in his waye, by meddleing in matters above his reach he hath fallen
in manye thinges to mistake and deceave himself; in some thinges
disputing soe nicely uppon the misteries of this our monarchie that
it may receave dubtfull interpretations, yea in some poynts verie
derogatorie to the supreame power of this crowne; in other cases
mistakeing the true state of the parliament of this kingdome and
the fundamentall constitutions and priviledges thereof, and in some
other poynts speaking unreverently of the comon lawe of England
and of the workes of some of the most famous and antient judges
therein; yt being a thinge utterlie unlawfull to anye subject to
speake or write against that lawe under which he liveth, and which
wee are sworne and are resolved to mayntayne. Wherefore uppon just
considerations moveing us hereunto for preventing of the said
errors and inconveniences in all tymes to come, wee doe hereby
not onlie prohibitt the buying, uttering, or reading of the said
bookes, but doe alsoe will and straightlie comaund all and singuler
persons whatsoever whoe have or shall have anye of them in their
handes or custodie, that uppon payne of our high displeasure and
the consequence thereof, they doe deliver the same presentlie uppon
this publication to the Lord Maior of London, yf they or anye of
them be dwelling in or neere the said cittie, or otherwise to the
Sheriff of the county where they or anye of them shall reside, and
in the twoe universities to the Chauncellor our Vicechauncellor
there, to the intent that further order maye be given for the utter
suppressing thereof. And because there shalbe better oversight
of bookes of all sortes before they come to the presse, wee have
resolved to make choice of commissioners that shall looke more
narrowlie into the nature of all those thinges that shalbe putt to
the presse either concerning our authoritie royall, or concerning
our goverment or the lawes of our kingdome, from whom a more strict
accompt shalbe yelded unto us then hath beene used heretofore.
Witnes our selfe at Westminster, the fyve and twentith daye of
March.
"Per ipsum regem.[17]"
36.
The Lord Coke his speech and charge. With a discoverie of the abuses
and corruption of officers. London, 1607.
This charge was given by Lord Coke at the Assizes held in Norwich
on the fourth of August, 1606, and it was printed in the next year
with an epistle dedicatory to the Earl of Exeter by R. P[ricket].
It was suppressed the day after publication, as appears from a
letter of John Chamberlain to Dudley Carleton, dated Feb. 13,
1607.[18]
37.
The Argument of Master Nicholas Fuller, in the case of Thomas Lad
and Richard Maunsell his clients. Wherein it is plainely proved that
the Ecclesiasticall Commissioners have no power, by vertue of their
commission, to imprison, to put to the oath ex officio, or to fine
any of his Majestie's subjects. Imprinted 1607.
For writing this book, Nicholas Fuller, a barrister of Gray's Inn,
was imprisoned by Archbishop Bancroft, and several notices of him
appear in the Domestic State Papers.
In a letter from Carleton to Chamberlain of September 16th,
1607, the writer says, "The king went to Lambeth to encourage the
Archbishop to proceed against Nicholas Fuller." Chamberlain writing
to Carleton on December 30th, 1607, says that "Mr. Fuller has paid
his fine, but submissions are expected which he cannot digest;" and
again in a letter of January 5th, 1608, he says that "Fuller the
puritan is freed."[19] This scarcely tallies with another account
of Fuller, which says that on his imprisonment by Archbishop
Bancroft, he remained in durance, and so died on February 23rd,
1619, aged 76 years.
38.
Conrad Vorst, The Works of.
Vorst was a celebrated Arminian divine. He was born at Cologne in
1569, and became Professor of Theology at Leyden in 1610; of which
he was deprived in 1619 in consequence of a decision of the Synod
of Dort. He died in 1622. In 1611 his books were publicly burnt
in St. Paul's Churchyard and both the Universities by the King's
order.[20]
39.
Francis Suarez, The Works of.
Suarez was a Spanish Jesuit. On Sunday, November 21st, 1613, some
books of this author derogatory to princes were publicly burnt at
Paul's Cross.[21]
40.
A book without title or date, but plainly of Catholic tendency.
Written by John Cotton, 1613.
I have not been able to meet with a copy of this book, but the
following extract from a letter from Rev. Thomas Lorkin to Sir
Thomas Puckering, dated June 24th, 1613[22] furnishes a brief
notice of the author, and the proceedings against him for this
publication.
"There hath lately come forth a proclamation against one Cotton,
a west country gentleman and a great recusant, charging him with
high treason against the King and state for having published a very
scandalous and railing book against his Majesty; and promising a
very large reward to whosoever could apprehend him and bring him
in. At the very self same time, this Cotton being to cross the
Thames and enquiring of the watermen what news, they not knowing
the man told him what was newly happened concerning himself.
Whereupon being landed, he muffled himself in his cloak, thinking
thereby to pass unknown to any of his acquaintance that he might
haply meet. But he had not passed thence many paces when one
Maine, a follower sometimes of the late Lord of Devonshire, and
a sure friend of his, meeting him in the street and discovering
well what he was, warned him likewise of danger, with protestation
nevertheless not to make any benefit of the discovery of his
friend, but wishing him to provide for his own safety. Thereupon
Cotton demanding his opinion what he thought fittest to be done, he
advised him to submit himself to the king's mercy: whose counsel he
followed, and presently went and surrendered himself into my Lord
of Southampton's hands, and so rests at his Majesty's mercy."
And in another letter from Lorkin to Sir Thomas Puckering, of June
30th, 1613,[23] the writer says "My last letters advertized you of
what had lately happened concerning Cotton, who yielding himself to
the king's clemency, doth nevertheless utterly disavow the book,
and constantly denieth to be the author of it, Hereupon his study
hath been searched, and there divers papers found, containing many
several pieces of the said book, and (which renders the man more
odious) certain relics of the late saints of the gunpowder treason,
as one of Digby's fingers, Percy's toe, some other part either of
Catesby or Rookwood (whether I well remember not) with the addition
of a piece of one of Peter Lambert's ribs, to make up the full mess
of them. If the proofs which are against him will not extend to the
touching of his life, at least they will serve to work him either
misery and affliction enough."
The following is a copy of the proclamation for the apprehension of
Cotton:--
"By the King.
"A proclamation for the search and apprehension of John Cotton,
Esquire.
"Whereas John Cotton of Warblington, otherwise of Subberton, in
the Countie of Southhampton, Esquire, is by sundry strong and
vehement presumptions, discovered to have committed matter full
of very strange and execrable high treasons, against our person
and state; and the same John Cotton (as it should appeare by all
circumstances) hath, upon a guiltie conscience, and some privie
intelligence of search intended for him, fled from his house and
dwelling, and lurketh or wandreth in unknowen places; although
it standeth not with the course of justice to condemne any man
unheard, yet for that the presumptions and proofes appeare to be so
forcible against him, as if after this publique notice, he shall
not forthwith come in, and render himselfe, we shall have iust
cause to conclude him guiltie; we have thought fit, (besides our
more secret directions) to have recourse to the industrie and love
of our people, which never failed us, in any case that concerned
our safetie or honour, for his bringing forth or apprehension.
"Wherefore wee doe charge and command all our Justices, Mayors,
Sheriffes, Bayliffes, Headboroughs, and Constables, and also all
officers of our ports, to doe their best and utmost endeavours,
to search for, and apprehend the said John Cotton; (of whom, for
the better informing of those that know not his person, wee have
caused a description to be hereunto annexed.) And doe neverthelesse
require all our loving subiects, not only to be aiding and
assisting to our said officers therein, but likewise to use their
owne particular diligence, care, and industrie, aswell for the
finding out and apprehending of the said John Cotton, as for the
giving intelligence and advertisement unto any of our justices or
officers, where hee hath beene at any time lately seene or met, or
otherwise where there is any likelyhood that he should harbour,
repaire, or be received.
"And for the better encouragement of our loving subiects to doe
their duety in this case (which wee take so much to heart) wee
doe hereby declare, signifie and promise, that whosoever shall
apprehend and bring into the hands of any our officers of justice,
the person of the said John Cotton living, shall have for his
reward the summe of one thousand crownes.
"And on the other side, if any of our subjects shall voluntarily
receive, harbour, convey, favour, or conceale the said John Cotton,
wee doe signifie unto them all, that we shall account them as
partakers, and abettors of the said treasons: and if any of our
officers, or others shall neglect or let passe any opportunitie,
occasion, or meanes for the performance, or executing of their
duety in this behalfe, we shall proceede against such persons to
their condigne punishment with all severitie according to our lawes.
"Given at our Palace of Westminster the eleventh day of June, in
the eleventh yeere of our reigne of Great Britaine, France, and
Ireland.
"God save the King.
"John Cotton is of the age of fourtie eight yeeres, or thereabouts,
of a reasonable tall stature, slender of body, the haire of
his head and beard flaxen, but now inclining to white, well
complexioned, with somewhat a long and leane visage.
"¶ Imprinted at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the King's most
excellent Maiestie.
"M.DC.XIII."[24]
41.
Abuses stript and whipt, or Satirical Essayes. By George Wyther.
London, 1613.
For this publication Wyther was committed to the Marshalsea, where
he remained several months.
42.
A book without title or date, written by Edmund Peacham, containing a
libel on the Bishop of Bath and Wells, and other libels. Circa 1614.
For writing this book Edmund Peacham, Rector of Hinton St. George,
in the county of Somerset, was deprived of his living by the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners on December 19th, 1614.[25] On the
18th January, 1615, Mr. Secretary Winwood, the Master of the
Rolls, the Lieutenant of the Tower, and others, were directed by
the Council to examine Peacham, then imprisoned in the Tower,
respecting his authorship of a treasonable book, and if he should
be obstinate in refusing to give needful information, to use the
manacles. In a letter from Chamberlain to Carleton of February
9th, 1615, Peacham was said to have been racked, but nothing could
be got from him; and the king was much incensed against him. Most
of the judges concurred in finding his case treason. He was tried
and condemned for high treason in the course of the year 1615,
and sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered, but he died in
Taunton gaol in the early part of the year 1616, as appears in a
letter from Chamberlain to Carleton of March 27, 1616.[26]
43.
History of the World. By Sir Walter Raleigh, 1614.
This book was called in "for too free censuring of princes."[27]
44.
De Politia Ecclesiæ Anglicanæ. By Richard Mockett, D.D. London, 1616.
This publication fell under censure because it favoured the
Calvinists. Dr. Mockett's intention was to give foreign churches
a fair notion of the doctrines of the English church; and for
that purpose he had translated the Prayer Book into Latin, adding
Jewel's Apology and Nowell's Catechism. But in his translation of
the Articles he had omitted the latter part, which sets forth the
power of the church in rites and ceremonies and in controversies of
faith. Besides this, instead of printing the Homilies at length,
he had given an abbreviation of them, not fairly representing the
opinions of this church; and moreover, in a treatise of his own,
he had not given the see of Winchester precedence over all others
next to London, but only over those whose bishops were not privy
councillors. Dr. Montagu, Bishop of Winchester, was at that time
on bad terms with Archbishop Abbot, whose chaplain Dr. Mockett
was; the king was appealed to; and the result was a public edict by
which the book was ordered to be burnt.[28]
45.
A Bride Bush, or a Wedding Sermon, compendiously describing the
duties of married persons. By the Rev. William Whately. London, 1617.
This sermon occasioned much controversy, and caused the preacher
to be summoned before the Court of High Commission, but he finally
submitted to the authority of the Court, and on May 4th, 1621,
signed a formal recantation of the assertions in his book "that
either adultery or long desertion dissolves marriage." This
submission is preserved among the Domestic State Papers of the
period, and is endorsed by Archbishop Laud.[29]
46.
A Book without title or date. By John Wraynham. Circa, 1618.
This book, of which I have not been able to meet with a copy,
appears to contain an attack on the Lord Chancellor, accusing him
of injustice in a chancery suit, and also slanderous words towards
the king. For its publication Mr. Wraynham was cited into the Star
Chamber, and received a severe sentence, which was however, through
the instrumentality of the Chancellor himself, reversed, as appears
from the following pardon preserved among the State Papers, and
dated July 16th, 1619. "Grant to John Wraynham, at intercession of
the Lord Chancellor, of pardon of the sentence of imprisonment for
life, fine of £1000, standing in the pillory, loss of his ears,
&c., to which he was condemned by the Star Chamber, for presenting
a slanderous petition to the King against the Lord Chancellor,
who decided a cause against him; also of pardon for putting his
case and proofs into a book, with an epistle to the King, and an
epilogue, in which were slanders and insolencies both against His
Majesty and the Chancellor."
47.
Balaam's Ass. Circa 1619.
Speculum Regale. Circa 1619.
These two books were written by John Williams, Esquire, of Essex,
barrister of the Middle Temple, who had been expelled the House of
Commons on account of his being a Roman Catholic, and in them he
affirmed that the king would die in the year 1621, grounded upon
the prophecy of Daniel. These books Williams at his trial told the
court were enclosed in a box sealed up, and thus secretly conveyed
to the king; and were never printed or published. On May 3rd, 1619,
he was arraigned at the King's Bench, Westminster, for this libel,
and condemned to be hanged, drawn, and quartered, which sentence
was carried out two days afterwards over against the Mews at
Charing Cross.
Two manuscript copies of _Balaam's Ass_ are extant, one in the
University Library of Cambridge (Dd. III, 84, art. 2), and another
in the Lansdowne M.S., No. 213, p. 59. It is entitled "Balaam's
Asse, or a Free Discourse touching the Murmurs and Feared
Discontents of the Time, and directed to his then Majestie King
James, by way of Humble Advertisement."
Among the manuscripts in the Cambridge University Library is
a duodecimo (class mark Ii, vi. 51), written in a hand of the
seventeenth century, containing "Notes of cases in the Star
Chamber, 17-20 James I." On the last leaf is written the following,
in the same hand:--
"A parcel of a pamphlett cast in the courte by Williams, bearinge
the title of Balaam's Ass, for which he were after executed.
"4 letters doe the persoun shewe,
"The place, the tymes, the tymes of woe.
H. E. E. I.
"H. sheweth the churche's first deflection,
"E. brought the churche to large protection,
"E. gave a woman churche subjection,
"I. shewes sinn ripe and at perfectione.
"Now putt together, 3, they crie,
"Alas, 'twas hee,--the 4th, 'twas I.
"Thus these 4 letters shewe the fall
"Of them and of their generall.
"Advesperascit vita mea:
"Domine, suscipe vitam meam:
"Post has tenebas spero lucem."
These four letters evidently designate Henry, Edward, Elizabeth,
and James.
The copy of Balaam's Ass in the Cambridge University Library
consists of forty eight pages of small folio, neatly written in a
hand of the seventeenth century.[30]
The following account of Williams's execution is taken from the
State Papers of the period.[31]
"Immediatly upon his comming to the gybbett, hee ascended up the
ladder, where, turning his face to the people, hee first began
with a hearty prayre for the longe lyfe and prosperous raigne
of the King, and then hee proceeded to the acknowledgment of
his fault, saying that hee had bin too buisy and sawcy with his
majesty, and that hee was heartily sory for that hee had so much
offended and distasted the King in wryteing that booke, which hee
was ledd to doe out of an inconsiderate love to his contry; then
hee told Mr. Dean and Mr. Fanshaw who told him that confession
was not answerable to his offence that hee wold gladly speak and
express him self in any thing they doubted of, wherupon Mr. Fanshaw
demaunded of him if there were noe more of them bookes abroad; to
which hee protested that there was not an other booke nor a peece
of itt in the world besydes that. Hee questioned him further why
hee wrote an Epistle to his Contrymen; he said, because it might
come the sooner to his majestie's veiwe: and why he wrote a Propesy
in his booke of the desolation of Whytehall, wherin he tooke upon
him to tell so precyzely the year, the month, and the day, when
the sayd howse shold be ruyened; to which hee aunswered, that hee
hoped they wold not thinke him so fond as to conceave himself to
be illuminated with any divine or propheticall spiritt, but that
which hee wrote was Ironiee. Then he fell to clear himself of an
imputation ... upon him yesterday that hee was an Atheist, by
reason of a passage in his booke, but hee professed himself to
bee a right Romayne Catholicke, and that his fayth was, that he
hoped to be saved cheifly and more effectually by the blood of
our Saviour shed for his sins; to which Mr. Dean answered that
hee ought absolutely to relye upon the death and passion of our
Saviour, and alleadged a place in Saint John that noe man cold come
to the Father but by the Son only, wherupon hee demanded that if
they wold have him make repetition of his fayth againe ... was the
same as before hee wold. Mr. Dean told him that they wold willingly
joyne with him in his prayres to God, hee said hee had done his
devotions ere he came to that place, and so gave the executioner a
handkerchef, which hee tyed about his head, and whylst hee was so
doeing hee prayed in Latin, and pulling the handkercheif over his
eyes hee said, 'Post tenebras spero lucem,' and so dyed."
48.
David Paræus, D.D., The Works of.
In June, 1622, the works of this writer were burnt at Paul's Cross
by order of the Privy Council. They were also burnt at Oxford by
order of the University, as seditious; and at a Senate of the
University of Cambridge they were "condemned to eternal infamy,"
and forbidden to be read.[32] Paræus was a celebrated Calvinistic
divine of the Reformed Church. He was born in Silesia in 1548, and
died in 1622, having been Professor in the University of Heidelberg.
49.
Mercurius Gallo Belgicus. 1623.
A set of this publication is in the Library of the British Museum,
but the volume containing the year 1623 is unfortunately missing.
One of the numbers published in October, 1623, seems to have
contained objectionable matter concerning the King, for on the 18th
of that month the Lord Keeper addressed the following letter to Mr.
Secretary Conway:
"Mr. Secretarie,
"Reading since supper this Mercurius Gallo Bellgicus which heere
with all I send unto you, I finde a passage about the 35th page
thereof soe full of falsehoodes and indignities towardes his
Majestie, that (although I knowe what a despicable esteeme this
author hath borne for manie yeares together), yet doe I hold yt,
in my poore discretion, verie unfitt that this discourse should
be borne in the handes and tost in the mouthes of his Majestie's
subjectes.
"I have therefore this night staied the further publishinge of this
booke by my expresse warrant untill I shall receive your doome from
thence, whether yt be to be contemned and past over or finallie
to be suppressed; I shall desire you to write unto me two wordes
heerein. And soe I bidd you hartelie farewell, and rest
"Westminster Colledge,
"18 October, 1623.
"Your verie assured
"Lovinge frend and servant,
"Jo. Lincoln C(ustos) S(igilli)."[33]
On the 25th October, Secretary Conway wrote in answer to the Lord
Keeper to instruct him to restrain this publication. (See Domestic
State Papers of the period.)
50.
A demonstration of the unlawful succession of the new Emperor,
Ferdinand. 1623.
This was a tract sheet printed by William Stansby for Nathaniel
Butter, bookseller, for which the Stationers' Company, by warrant
from the Council, nailed up Stansby's printing house, and broke
down his presses. He petitioned Secretary Calvert for pardon and
restoration to his business, but the result does not appear.[34]
51.
Vox Cœli, or Newes from Heaven, of a Consultation there held by the
High and Mighty Princes, King Henry 8, King Edward 6, Prince Henry,
Queene Mary, Queene Elizabeth, and Queene Anne; wherein Spaine's
ambition and treacheries to most kingdomes and free estates of Europe
are unmask'd and truly repesented, but more particularly towards
England, and now more especially under the pretended match of Prince
Charles with the Infanta Dona Maria. Whereunto is annexed two letters
written by Queene Mary from Heaven, the one to Count Gondomar, the
ambassadour of Spaine, the other to all the Roman Catholiques of
England. Written by S. R. N. I. Printed in Elisium. 1624.
Votivæ Angliæ, or the desires and wishes of England. Contayned in a
patheticall discourse, presented to the King on New Yeares Day last.
Wherein are unfolded and represented manie strong reasons, and true
and solide motives, to perswade his Majestie to drawe his royall
sword, for the restoring of the Pallatynat and Electorat to his sonne
in lawe Prince Fredericke, to his onlie daughter the Ladie Elizabeth,
and theyr Princelie Issue, against the treacherous usurpation and
formidable ambition and power of the Emperour, the King of Spayne,
and the Duke of Bavaria, whoe unjustlie possesse and detayne the
same. Together with some aphorismes returned (with a large interest)
to the Pope, in answer of his. Written by S. R. N. I. Printed at
Utrecht, MDCXXIIII.
These books were written by Mr. Reynolds, Viscount Fielding's
tutor, and for so doing he was imprisoned. They displeased the king
much.[35]
In a letter from John Locke to Carleton, dated July 11th, 1624, the
writer says "A poor man is in trouble for printing a book called
Votiva Angliæ; the Commission Court were about to liberate him,
when the king ordered him to be remanded and to pay £1000 fine, as
he was said to have gained £1000 by the book."
In or about the year 1626, Reynolds, who was then a prisoner in
the Fleet, addressed a petition to the Council in which he stated
that he was forced from France by order of the late king, and on
his arrival in England was committed to prison for being the
author of the "Votiva Angliæ," in which he deplored the loss of the
Palatinate, and desired its restitution, which "every true hearted
Englishman ought to wish and pray for;" and that he had been
imprisoned full two years, during which time he incurred a debt of
£300 for his maintenance; also that he owed sixty and odd pounds
for which he was surety, and was threatened to be arrested for the
same as soon as he was at liberty; and he concludes by praying for
protection against arrest for one year.[36]
52.
A game at Chaess, as it was acted nine days together at the Globe on
the Banks side. (By Thomas Middleton.) 1624.
The title is engraved, and contains figures of a fat bishop (the
Bishop of Spalatro), a black knight (Count Gondomar), and a white
knight (the Duke of Buckingham). For writing this play the author
was committed to prison. In a letter written by Sir Francis
Nethersole on August 14th, 1624, he refers to this play thus: "A
new play, the plot of which is a game of chess, in which the whole
Spanish business is taken up, and Gondomar brought on to the stage,
is so popular that the players gain £100 a night."[37]
This play gave great offence to the king, for the players were very
speedily called before the Council and forbidden to play until they
had appeared before his majesty;[38] and on August 21st the Council
sent the following letter to Secretary Conway.
"After our verie heartie comendacions according to his majesty's
pleasure signified to this Board by your letter of the 12th of
August, touching the suppressing of a scandalous comedie acted
by the king's players, wee have called before us some of the
principall Actors and demaunded of them by what lycence and
authoritie they have presumed to act the same, in answer whereunto
they produced a booke being an orriginall and perfect coppie
thereof (as they affirmed) seene and allowed by Sir Henry Herbert,
Knight, Master of the Revells, under his owne hand and subscribed
in the last page of the said booke. We demaunding further whether
there were no other partes or passages represented on the stage,
then those expressely contained in the booke, they confidentlie
protested they added or varied from the same nothing at all. The
Poett they tell us is one Midleton, who shifting out of the way
and not attending the Board with the rest as was expected, wee
have given warrant to a messinger for the apprehending of him. To
those that were before us, we gave a round and sharpe reprooffe,
making them sensible of his Majesty's high displeasure herein,
giving them strict charge and commaund that they presume not to
act the said commedie any more, nor that they suffer any other
play or enterlude whatsoever to be acted by them or any of their
company untill his Majesty's pleasure be further knowne. Wee have
caused them likewise to enter into bond for their attendance upon
the Board whensoever they shalbe called; as for our certifieing to
his Majestie (as was intimated by your letter) what passages in the
said comedie we should finde to be offensive and scandalous, wee
have thought it our duties for his Majesty's clearer informacion to
send herewithall the booke it self, subscribed as aforesaid by the
Master of the Revells, that so either your self or some other whom
his Majestie shall appoint to peruse the same, may see the passages
themselves out of the orriginall, and call Sir Henry Herbert before
you to know a reason of his lycenceing thereof, who (as we are
given to understand) is now attending at court. So having done as
much as we conceived agreable with our duties in conformitie to
his Majestie's royall commaundementes and that which we hope shall
give him full satisfaction, we shall continue our humble praiers
to Almightie God for his health and safetie, and bid yow verie
heartilie farewell. From Whitehall the 21st of August, 1624.
Your assured verie loving freindes,
G. Cant.
Th. Grandisone.
Arundell and Surrey.
Arthure Chichester.
Geo. Calvert."[39]
53.
Appello Cæsarem. A just Appeale from two unjust Informers. By Richard
Mountagu. London. 1625.
For writing this book, Mr. Richard Mountagu, Canon of Windsor,
Fellow of Eton, Rector of Stamford Rivers, and Chaplain in ordinary
to his Majesty was brought to the bar of the House of Commons
on July 7th, 1625, and articles were exhibited against him, but
proceedings were dropped.[40] On January 17th, 1628, the book was
called in and suppressed by a proclamation of which the following
is a copy:--
A proclamation for the suppressing of a booke intituled _Appello
Cæsarem_, or _An Appeale to Cæsar_.
"Whereas Wee out of our care to conserve and maintaine the church
committed to our charge in the unity of true religion and the bond
of peace, and not to suffer unnecessary disputes, which may trouble
the quiet both of Church and State, have lately caused the Articles
of Religion to bee reprinted, as a rule for avoyding of diversities
of opinion, and for the establishing of consent in true religion; we,
continuing our desire to compasse this wished effect, and considering
that the booke written by Richard Montague, now Bishop of Chichester,
then but Batchelor of Divinitie, intituled (Appello Cæsarem or An
Appeale to Cæsar) and published in the yeere (1625), was the first
cause of those disputes and differences which have sithence much
troubled the quiet of the church, have thought it fitting to take
away the occasion by calling in the said booke; and therfore we
doe hereby will and straightly command all and singular persons
whatsoever, who have or shall have any of them in their hands or
custodie, that upon paine of our high displeasure and the consequence
thereof, they doe deliver the same presently upon this publication to
the Lord Bishop of the diocesse, or his chancellor, if it bee out of
the Universities, or if it be in either of the two Universities, to
the Chancellor or Vice-Chancellor there, whom wee straightly command
to suppresse the same; hoping thereby, that men will no more trouble
themselves with these unnecessary questions, the first occasion being
taken away. But if wee shall bee deceived in this our expectation,
and that by reading, preaching, or making bookes, either pro or
contra, concerning these differences, men begin anew to dispute, wee
shall take such order with them and those bookes, that they shall
wish they had never thought upon these needlesse controversies.
Given at our Court at White-Hall, the seventeenth day of January,
in the fourth yeere of our reigne, of Great Britaine, France, and
Ireland.
God save the King.
Imprinted at London by Bonham Norton and John Bill, printers to the
King's most Excellent Majestie. MDCXXVIII."